Clinton approved CIA drone assassinations with her cellphone, report says • Hacker News Board

Re: Clinton approved CIA drone assassinations with her cellphone, report says

#21

Post by spacecowboy_lon » Mon, Jun 13, 2016, 9:54 AM UTC

gonvaled wrote: post #19

Fuxy wrote: post #17

Whenever I hear something about US drone Strikes I always think how long until the other side starts getting drones developed and and easy way to mass produce them and smuggle them into the US assemble them and start launching drone strikes from within the US on US persons of interest like politicians and CIA officials. Drone parts are getting cheaper and cheaper and easier to get it's only a matter a time someone st…

Which of course is the only bad thing about drone strikes, right? That they could ever hit the "right guys"? Who cares that hundreds of innocent civilians are killed, if they are not american citizens? Disgusting, really. EDIT, for the downvoters you'll have to justify what in my comment you do not like. The parent is making the case that what worries him/her is that drone strikes will eventually be used to attack am…

Compered to the previous method of carpet bombing?

Re: Clinton approved CIA drone assassinations with her cellphone, report says

#22

Post by gonvaled » Mon, Jun 13, 2016, 9:57 AM UTC

spacecowboy_lon wrote: post #21

gonvaled wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which of course is the only bad thing about drone strikes, right? That they could ever hit the "right guys"? Who cares that hundreds of innocent civilians are killed, if they are not american citizens? Disgusting, really. EDIT, for the downvoters you'll have to justify what in my comment you do not like. The parent is making the case that what worries him/her is that drone strikes will eventually be used to attack am…

Compered to the previous method of carpet bombing?

Who is comparing what to carpet bombing?

My comment is directly referring to the fact that american targets are something that worries the parent, but foreign targets (civilians) seem to not worry him/her that much.

What do carpet bombs have to do with all this?

Re: Clinton approved CIA drone assassinations with her cellphone, report says

#23

Post by ZeroGravitas » Mon, Jun 13, 2016, 9:59 AM UTC

pjc50 wrote: post #12

golergka wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This description fits almost any action that you can perform when you're at war. So, either you advocate that war courts review cases of all the enemy soldiers before aithorizing an attack, or you have to come up with a more precise definition of what is exactly wrong here. Clarification: I'm not a fan of CIA assasinations, far from it; but "execution without a trial" isn't logically justifiable complaint: we do it i…

enemy soldiers There is a legal obligation in the Geneva protocols 1949 to identify who you're targeting and refrain from targeting civilians. https://www.icrc.org/applic/ihl/ihl.nsf/9ac284404d38ed2bc125... "refrain from deciding to launch any attack which may be expected to cause incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, damage to civilian objects, or a combination thereof, which would be excessive in r…

The very words you quote authorise "incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, damage to civilian objects" as long as it's not "excessive", and the treating of a "place of worship, a house or other dwelling or school" as a military target as long as you're fairly sure it's being used for military purposes.

Obviously you can argue about what is "excessive" and what is a "case of doubt" but whoever wrote these lines was clearly anticipating blowing churches and civilians up and it being within the rules.

I don't say this to make drone killing seem more humane, but to make war in general seem like the everyday insanity that it is.

Re: Clinton approved CIA drone assassinations with her cellphone, report says

#24

Post by Fuxy » Mon, Jun 13, 2016, 10:01 AM UTC

gonvaled wrote: post #19

Fuxy wrote: post #17

Whenever I hear something about US drone Strikes I always think how long until the other side starts getting drones developed and and easy way to mass produce them and smuggle them into the US assemble them and start launching drone strikes from within the US on US persons of interest like politicians and CIA officials. Drone parts are getting cheaper and cheaper and easier to get it's only a matter a time someone st…

Which of course is the only bad thing about drone strikes, right? That they could ever hit the "right guys"? Who cares that hundreds of innocent civilians are killed, if they are not american citizens? Disgusting, really. EDIT, for the downvoters you'll have to justify what in my comment you do not like. The parent is making the case that what worries him/her is that drone strikes will eventually be used to attack am…

No if that ever happens i would just think karma is a bitch.

I'm not a US citizen and I don't agree with the use of drones if even one civilian get hurt by it. What's the point of precision strikes if you're still get innocent people involved.

Re: Clinton approved CIA drone assassinations with her cellphone, report says

#25

Post by rurban » Mon, Jun 13, 2016, 10:06 AM UTC

jflatow wrote: post #11

m_eiman wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Saying that the US is at war with various groups of people in the country side of Pakistan is a rather generous definition of the concept of war, isn't it? It's more like "the US is blowing up people who may or may not be those intended, but it's kinda hard to tell since they're doing it all by remote control".

Also, congress hasn't declared war since WWII, which is required by law.

No it's not. They came up with the interpretation that the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Powers_Resolution allows them to engage into limited armed conflicts without Congress authorization. Which is dearly needed, because that's what they are doing since decades, with the CIA and friends. And several such CIA wars happened even without the President's authorization, but usually the just lie to the president to able to engage in such armed conflicts.

What this War Powers Resolution does not authorize is a formal declaration of war (Clinton did not care) and any engagement voiding the Geneva conventions. All those drone killings are of course war crimes. This is one of the reasons the US does not recognize international law.

Re: Clinton approved CIA drone assassinations with her cellphone, report says

#26

Post by kkarakk » Mon, Jun 13, 2016, 10:06 AM UTC

spacecowboy_lon wrote: post #20

Fuxy wrote: post #17

Whenever I hear something about US drone Strikes I always think how long until the other side starts getting drones developed and and easy way to mass produce them and smuggle them into the US assemble them and start launching drone strikes from within the US on US persons of interest like politicians and CIA officials. Drone parts are getting cheaper and cheaper and easier to get it's only a matter a time someone st…

Well Deash and Al Queda don't seem to have much ability to get the good explosives required for that - Compare them to the PIRA and UDF during the troubles. I am surprised that they haven't tried the sort of improvised mortars the the IRA used an almost hit the Cabinet at no 10

just make a heavy enuff drone and stick glass/shrapnel on it with lighter fluid in it. fly it into the person you want dead and ignite. being near drones freaks me out

Re: Clinton approved CIA drone assassinations with her cellphone, report says

#27

Post by gonvaled » Mon, Jun 13, 2016, 10:07 AM UTC

Fuxy wrote: post #24

gonvaled wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which of course is the only bad thing about drone strikes, right? That they could ever hit the "right guys"? Who cares that hundreds of innocent civilians are killed, if they are not american citizens? Disgusting, really. EDIT, for the downvoters you'll have to justify what in my comment you do not like. The parent is making the case that what worries him/her is that drone strikes will eventually be used to attack am…

No if that ever happens i would just think karma is a bitch. I'm not a US citizen and I don't agree with the use of drones if even one civilian get hurt by it. What's the point of precision strikes if you're still get innocent people involved.

> No if that ever happens i would just think karma is a bitch.

Don't follow you.

> I'm not a US citizen ...

You still seem to be specially worried that drones will target "US persons of interest", which is what my comment was highlighting.

I do not care a little bit more about drones targeting "US persons of interest" than they targeting innocent civilians. Actually, I might care less, since "innocent civilian" by definition is a person with no responsibility whatsoever in a conflict, and that connotation is not lexically present in the phrase "US person of interest".

Re: Clinton approved CIA drone assassinations with her cellphone, report says

#28

Post by ape4 » Mon, Jun 13, 2016, 10:10 AM UTC

Fuxy wrote: post #17

Whenever I hear something about US drone Strikes I always think how long until the other side starts getting drones developed and and easy way to mass produce them and smuggle them into the US assemble them and start launching drone strikes from within the US on US persons of interest like politicians and CIA officials. Drone parts are getting cheaper and cheaper and easier to get it's only a matter a time someone st…

By then we'll have anti-drone drones.

Re: Clinton approved CIA drone assassinations with her cellphone, report says

#29

Post by tajen » Mon, Jun 13, 2016, 10:10 AM UTC

belorn wrote: post #14

golergka wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This description fits almost any action that you can perform when you're at war. So, either you advocate that war courts review cases of all the enemy soldiers before aithorizing an attack, or you have to come up with a more precise definition of what is exactly wrong here. Clarification: I'm not a fan of CIA assasinations, far from it; but "execution without a trial" isn't logically justifiable complaint: we do it i…

Any action? Lets look at some specifics and ask which ones should count as murder. A reasonable person might see a different degree of justification in each case. A person wielding a gun is running and firring their weapon towards a solider. The solider shoots back and kills them. A boat full with military weapons enters an areas which marines are defending and refuse to turn back. The marines sinks the boat. A tank…

I don't see what degree of difference there is in your first 4 examples: They're all armed people in a situation of war.

Of course the last 3 are murders (although we know that the Allied erased most of German and Japanese cities, including the civilian neighbourhoods, for morale and retaliation) and the 4th before the end (killing military workers) is debatable.

Last point, concerning French nationals who went to Syria twice to train in military camps and came back to lead the terrorist attacks with actual killings: Can we please extend the Geneva convention to consider them ennemy military corps (and thus, prisonners of war)? I have zero tolerance for police investigating innocents or listening to everyone, but once we know what they've done, I wonder why they just face some penal law (a few years in jail, max, like a driver in a car accident).

Re: Clinton approved CIA drone assassinations with her cellphone, report says

#30

Post by dogma1138 » Mon, Jun 13, 2016, 10:10 AM UTC

spacecowboy_lon wrote: post #20

Fuxy wrote: post #17

Whenever I hear something about US drone Strikes I always think how long until the other side starts getting drones developed and and easy way to mass produce them and smuggle them into the US assemble them and start launching drone strikes from within the US on US persons of interest like politicians and CIA officials. Drone parts are getting cheaper and cheaper and easier to get it's only a matter a time someone st…

Well Deash and Al Queda don't seem to have much ability to get the good explosives required for that - Compare them to the PIRA and UDF during the troubles. I am surprised that they haven't tried the sort of improvised mortars the the IRA used an almost hit the Cabinet at no 10

They don't need to improvise mortars, ISIS is riding on captured M1A1's and has access to pretty decent soviet and western arms including ATGM's and AA.

Both AQ and ISIS and virtually any other terrorist organization in the world has access to pretty much "state of the art" arms the limit is usually lies in logistical operation not inaccessibility, look at the arm shipments that the Israelis have captures at sea over the years those included radar guided anti-ship missiles, terminally guided rockets, and Strela GTAM's.

Compared to that getting good explosive is easy, you can buy military grade explosive on the civilian market for demolition C4, PETN and RDX are commonly used for suicide vests and IEDs nothing ever stopped anyone from stuffing an RC plane with them and run it into the white house other than intelligence and perimeter security.